IMPORTANT POINT
Larger issue of law as to whether private unaided schools are governed by State Act and Rules mace thereunder or guidelines of CBSE to which they are affiliated, left open.

Headnote:Education Laws – Fee structure of private unaided schools – Whether governed by State Act and Rules mace thereunder or guidelines of CBSE to which they are affiliated – Issue left open. (Para 5)
       Administration of Justice – Judicial Propriety – Court constituting Fee Structure Committee in presence of counsel of parties – No objection raised – Committee submitting its report – Objection as to competence and expertise of the Committee cannot be raised now. (Para 9)
       Facts of the case:
       The High Court has held that DAV Public Schools operating in the State of Odisha, although private unaided educational institutions, are covered by the provisions of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 and hence the fees levied by such schools are subject to policy decisions of the State Government and their Managing Committee should conform to the requirements of the Act of 1969 read with relevant Rules of 1991.
       The fee structure revised by the concerned schools was not approved by the State Government and the High Court held against the appellant that revision of the fee structure could not be justified by the appellant that it is commensurate with the facilities provided to the students.
       Finding of the Court:
       There is no good reason to take exception to the fee structure recommended by the Fee Structure Committee.
       Result: Appeal partly allowed.

JUDGMENT

SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J. –

1. Leave granted.

2. This Appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 6.9.2011 whereby the Orissa High Court dismissed, amongst other appeals, Writ Appeal No.387 of 2011 preferred by the appellant herein and upheld judgment and order of a learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.5326 of 2009 etc. pronounced on 27.6.2011. The High Court has held that DAV Public Schools operating in the State of Odisha, are although private unaided educational institutions, but are covered by the provisions of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1969’] and hence the fees levied by such schools are subject to policy decisions of the State Government and their Managing Committee should conform to the requirements of the Act of 1969 read with relevant Rules of 1991. The fee structure revised by the concerned schools was not approved by the State Government and the High Court held against the appellant that revision of the fee structure could not be justified by the appellant that it is commensurate with the facilities provided to the students.

3. Apparently, this Court agreed with the contention of the Appellant that existing fee structure required some upward revision in view of appellant’s case that it had decided to implement the higher pay scales as recommended by the 6th Central Pay Commission and hence after notice upon the respondents, this Court passed the following interim order on 11.5.2012 :

“…………

Subject to the petitioner’s filing an undertaking in the Registry of this Court within one week from today that from the month of June, 2012, the petitioner shall implement the pay-scales as recommended by the 6th Pay Commission, following pro tem ad hoc arrangement is made subject to the final outcome in the Special Leave Petition.

(i) The petitioner shall submit its complete account of income and expenditure with detailed figures to the Interim Committee constituted under the impugned judgment within two weeks from today.

(ii) Within three weeks of receipt of the accounts from the petitioner, the Interim Committee will examine and evaluate the impact on the financial burden on the petitioner’s schools by implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission. The Interim Committee shall, accordingly allow the rise in the fee.

Needless to say that the determination of rise in fee by the Interim Committee shall be uninfluenced by the impugned judgment and also without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner in the Special Leave Petition.

Before taking any decision, the Interim Committee shall hear the representatives of the petitioner and parents’ association (respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein).

We also direct that until further orders, the existing Managing Committee, as constituted under the CBSE bye-laws, shall continue. ………”

4. After extending the time granted to the Interim Committee for taking the required decision, this Court was ultimately informed by learned counsel for the State of Odisha that the Interim Committee was not in a position to analyse properly the financial implications/financial statements and other documents submitted by the DAV authorities and, therefore, this Court, by order dated 22.3.2013, deprecated the changing stand of the State of Odisha but accepted its prayer made in I.A. No.9 of 2013 and issued a fresh direction to the appellant to make an application for fixation of fee structure of the school before Fee Structure Committee, Odisha headed by Justice K.P. Mohapatra, Retired Judge of High Court of Orissa and the Committee was requested to submit its Report to this Court within a time frame. The Committee was allowed further time on 22.4.2013. The receipt of the Report from the Committee was noted by this Court on 8.5.2013 and order was passed to make available copy of the said Report to the Advocates on Record on both the sides.

5. Before adverting to the submissions of the parties with regard to Report of the Fee Structure Committee dat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2014 Supreme(SC) 302

IMPORTANT POINTLarger issue of law as to whether private unaided schools are governed by State Act and Rules mace thereunder or guidelines of CBSE to which they are affiliated, left open.

IMPORTANT POINT
Larger issue of law as to whether private unaided schools are governed by State Act and Rules mace thereunder or guidelines of CBSE to which they are affiliated, left open.